If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Goblin of Mars

Here is my take on the Goblin of Mars:

The above is the NASA image ( http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl-raw-ima...000E1_DXXX.jpg )... resized to 800% and enhanced a bit to show details. NASA had stored the image as Q=070 (therefore this is not a "raw image"). As you can see, the 070 compression created square patterns in the image. The "teeth" are really just compression artifacts.

The original shown image in the following link ( http://www.ufosightingsdaily.com/201...-stunning.html ) was modified and enhanced to show what the author was trying to demonstrate... unfortunately, they obliterated the compression artifacts (in the "mouth") in order to make a more convincing image that the object is artificial in nature (I am not saying they were intentionally trying to deceive, they were just being a little zealous).

I then did a contrast analysis of it and then ran the dodge tool over the "teeth" to bring out the highlights of those shapes. The image in the top left corner show those shapes very clearly. See how slanted they are?

Ok, nevermind. My analysis was from the "original" shown in the video but it's obvious that You Tube's compression utility distorted that image. So that renders my analysis null.

I agree with Marvin. That guy obviously manipulated that NASA photograph. The one on the NASA site.

Hang in there Agent 99.

The issue actually starts with the NASA photo... which was compressed (Q=070), so NASA is the source of the blocks seen in the photo/video (which create the teeth). The nomenclature of the photo (file name) was different than "normal" NASA photos which is what made me look for the compression.

0184MR0925102000E1_DXXX.jpg

The _DXXX at the end of the file name is different than normal NASA jpeg files and is something added to the original file name. I have seen others with the added extension like this and they too were saved as compressed (Q=070) files. I think the author of the UTube video was unaware of the compression and "Shopped" the image to bring out the "details." Unfortunately, this enhanced the non-existent teeth and is how misinformation is spread.

I look forward to seeing more of your work.

M

PS... Take a look at the enlargement I provided at the top of this post, you can see the block pattern over the entire face of the "goblin." The following is the link to the photo:

Hi Marvin. It was very early in the morning when I posted those posts. Was still in the process of waking up and somehow when I skimmed over your first post, I missed the part where you said your image that you analyzed was from the NASA site. Didn't pay attention to that NASA link either. But like the fool that I am, I clicked on that article and from there I did that analysis. Wasn't until everything was posted that I went back and, this time round, carefully read over what you wrote about it. Yes, I did everything backwards...

So it's strange that NASA only had the compressed version of that photo up there and not the original. Very interesting.

I understand why you're saying what the author of that video did but it also looks to me like he digitally manipulated the compressed NASA photo to make those "teeth" look even more like "teeth".

But the fact that NASA only had the compressed version of that photo up on their site is much more intriguing... I agree.

Anyway, you're "The Photography Analysis Guy" and it's always a real pleasure to read whatever new analysis you post here. I just do things out of habit. I like to look at whatever you or anyone else analyzes in one of my own editors just to see if I can find anything else.

So it's strange that NASA only had the compressed version of that photo up there and not the original. Very interesting.

<snip>

But the fact that NASA only had the compressed version of that photo up on their site is much more intriguing... I agree.

After looking at numerous NASA photos, I discovered NASA edits all of there photo with Photoshop before releasing them to the public. I am not saying there are any nefarious reasons for doing this, it is done to simply create the best image possible (to optimize the image) for release. IMHO, if NASA wants to hide something, they simply do not release the image. Normally with released images, the quality is left at Q=100. I have see a few of these compressed photos released... the only issue is that are worthless for any serious photo analysis, which is why we demand "original" untouched/uncompressed images/photos. My best guess is these images have accidently been included with the raw images.

Originally Posted by A99

I understand why you're saying what the author of that video did but it also looks to me like he digitally manipulated the compressed NASA photo to make those "teeth" look even more like "teeth".

I think the author got a bit excited about the image and tried to demonstrate the facial appearance on the rock. Yes, the image was over enhanced to show a mouth with teeth... but that was the point they were making... they are saying this rock has a mouth with teeth. What they totally missed, is why they were perceiving the teeth on this rock. As with most of these "rock images that look artificially created," there was very little analysis (facts and evidence) used, but the video was very heavy with opinion which was being sold as facts and evidence. The sad part is there will be a lot of viewers of this video who will be convinced this is scientific evidence of a Goblin Head statue, artificially created, on Mars.

A99, I encourage you to pursue analysis if that is your interest and I again look forward to more of your post here. Our forum members deserve to have the information they need to make an informed decision.

I could never do what you do Marvin... I'm simply not as scientifically analytical as you are. This and the fact that I'm just your everyday person of avg. intelligence who's a bit too curious for her own good. In short, to do what you do, you need an intelligence that's above avg and you've demonstrated that over and over again. I love your approach and there have been times when I have found your findings... mind boggling!